Jason Ross

I know the feeling is going to be that the opener totally backfired, but it may not have entirely. The goal of an opener is to get your SP deeper into the game - in this instance when Shota would be facing Tatis and Machado for a third time it will still only be his second. Giving up a run certainly is not optimal, but I wouldn't classify it as a total bust if Shota gets 5 innings of good quality behind it.

Big K(ittredge)

Pfft. Annoying. Back-to-back chases lead to singles.

Regardless of what the wind is doing at Wrigley today. Cleveland's wind-insanity wins the day. Woof. What a rough day to be an outfielder. Even rougher; Chase DeLauter is making his MLB debut in this nonsense after not playing since July due to injury.

Meaningless for 2024 and 2025, they can't apply it retroactively. It's just for 2026 and beyond, the AAV would jump under $3m. But yeah, overall, I think the Cubs would be very hard pressed to decline the option. Shota at $16m is very reasonable for a mid-rotation starter. That we know that he can find some extra juice is more reason to believe he'd be a very likely pickup. I won't ever say "never" but I think the Cubs picking up his option is one of the most likely things all offseason.

Oh duh. You quoted Craig.

Miller has a few injuries in his history including a UCL sprain. He's started some games in the minors, but he's never gone very long. He's just not a starter. Much of the reason he can consistently hit 100mph and have such a good slider is because he only throws 20 pitches a game. If he threw, 80, he'd probably lose a few mph and some of the ability to throw his slider. Daniel Palencia has a slider that grades out really good on Stuff+ and hits 100+mph and he isn't a SP either (anymore, his issue was really walk related, but he also wasn't averaging 100mph in the MiLB when he was a SP either). Just is what it is. It's what makes someone like Skenes and Skubal that special that they can carry 100mph into the 7th. They're insane.

His final contract would be 5/$80m if they opt in. These numbers come directly from MLB.com. 5/$80m is $16m AAV. Currently his AAV is being factored in from his 4/$53m deal. Which is $13.25m. His AAV would rise under $3m. I'm only looking at AAV. https://www.mlb.com/news/shota-imanaga-cubs-deal

The Cubs care about the LT more than anything. It's the AAV that will matter most, especially with a lot of the dead money from releases and retention off the book. I don't think $2m is really a big deal - it's a near non-factor, even to the Cubs. It's half of what Turner made.

It would jump to a $16m AAV if the Cubs opt in. It's a difference of under $3m on the LT if they opt in. They must make this decision essentially, immediately in the offseason. There is no wait-and-see. Here are the three options: 1. They opt in, sightly raising his LT number and getting him for the next three years. 2. They opt out and Shota also opts out, becoming a FA 3. They opt out, and Shota opts into a 4 year contract, forgoing free agency. The opt in only increases three-years, and the Cubs love shorter-term contracts (I.E. see every free agency under Hoyer). The Cubs are not afraid of pitchers in their 30's (I.E. see who they brought in last year, Rea, Pressley and Boyd). The Cubs are already short Justin Steele for at least a month if not a bit more next year and Wiggins is about the only prospect near-MLB ready to take a spot. It's already very likely if they don't resign Kyle Tucker that much of the excess will be spent on a pitcher. Think Michael King or so. Do we really think that the Cubs are going to opt-out right away of this contract? They would then have to bring in two SP's next year instead of one, they have no guarantee which FA pitcher they could acquire to replace him, and it would likely cost even more to bring in someone else. I am sure the Cubs will consider all options. I also think this will be an easy decision. They will opt in to the final 3 years. Yes.

A bit of column A and a bit of column B. His fastball shape is one that will be prone to HR's if he gets too much of the bottom 2/3rds of the zone, which he did this year. He lowered his arm angle a further few degrees which caused more arm-side run (dropping arm slots do that). I think this caused his fastball to come in more shallow and catch the zone more. High-ride fastballs have a tendency to "rise" into the hitting zone when kept low. What he needs to do is keep it up more. I would not be surprised to see his arm angle move closer to the 40-degree mark he was last year. Nothing else really concerns me in the profile.

The Cubs hold the first option. I don't think anything else will matter. If the Cubs were to decline it, Shota could decline and become a FA, or could just allow the contract to slide to 4 years. The Cubs probably are not going to decline the option and risk him leaving, So it'd be $16m AAV. Still that of a good #4 or so on a contending roster. About what Taillon was given four years prior.

I think the Ian Happ thing is very different. For Happ, I believe the dislike (or complaints) stem from a few things. Largely, I think it comes back to his style being "good not great". He does a lot of things good. Defensively (for a LF'er, a low bar) he's good. Offensively, he's good, but nothing stands out. So he's often overlooked. He has no bankable singular skill that carries the day.

I would bet it's a near lock they pick him up for the final 3 years. His AAV of $13.25m is asking him to be a #4 on a good staff. He had a bumpy year at times, had an injury, and I think his fastball command waned, but that's a pretty easy and inexpensive bet for how good he can be. Bertz also brought up how early they have to make the decision. I'd put it at 90/10 they pick it up, and frankly, that might be low as long as he doesn't blow his elbow out in the playoffs.

I actually am not entirely certain that the bold is true, but it's because I believe that the real root of the thing comes back to misguided feelings on Tucker as well as misguided feelings on Ballesteros. When it comes to Tucker. I think many have resigned themselves to this as a one-and-done year, In other words, he's not a "real" Cub to many. They have decided that his August is somehow the real Tucker, or that he couldn't possibly DH on a nagging injury. We have seen the fanbase at times look for reasons to throw fits about him at any moment since July. On the Ballesteros aspect, I think an old Family Guy skit explains the concept really well but rookies who we have little MLB sample size exist as a mystery box that could be anything to many of the fanbase and Ballesteros is that mystery box. He's had some recent success too - success I'm a little wary of being capable of being replicated against the best pitchers in baseball (who you should expect to face almost exclusively in the playoffs). And because he'll be with the Cubs for the next six years, he is the future. Combined, I think the injury is a cover story for what would be happening if Tucker was slumping as well. That's not saying you're doing that, but I think a lot of the root of this comes down to all of this. I don't think it's always conscious either. For the record: Kyle Tucker over Moises Ballesteros is the correct choice barring him being so hurt he can't swing. Tucker was 20% better at hitting MLB pitchers than Mo Baller was at hitting Triple-A pitchers.

I'm sad I missed this.

Do you want me to timestamp when I rank *all* the posters or just when I rank you?

We'll be live after every game. Come spend some time with us, We're taking questions, reacting, etc. (It'll be a lot more fun when we win, but even during a loss we'll be live)

Hell yes.

Insurance!

Only in the playoffs. Because why not make your league look closer and closer to an Eastern European Hockey team on the biggest stage?

They should turn down the difficuluty on Mason Miller from HoF to like, veteran, just to be fair.

Jackson Merril did have a very good year last year! Jackson Merril was just as good as Ian Happ *this* year. How many players have had statistically good outlier years and then never replicated them? Even last year, that would require Jackson Merril to be a 9 win player. He was a 5.3 win player. Happ is consistently 3-high 3 wins. He's not even "two times" the player. At his best, he's been about 1.5 wins or so better. But we don't have any data to suggest that's going to be the norm. In 2025, they've been nearly identical. Here's another data point: xwOBA - Happ: .363 and Merril - .360 We don't need to be hyperbolic.

Ian Happ fWAR: 2.8 Jackson Merril fWAR: 3.0 Ian Happ wRC+: 116 Jackson Merril wRC+: 116 I'm not very good at math, but that isn't "three times" the player. That seems like, exactly as good as the other. Maybe you have Happ bunt, maybe you don't - some players just aren't good at it and by bunting you put yourself in an even worse position than the swing, but for the love of god, stop the Ian Happ hate.